Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30340599›Full record

ArticleHealth and quality of life outcomes2018

Defining the minimally clinically important difference of the SF-36 physical function subscale for paediatric CFS/ME: triangulation using three different methods.

Amberly Brigden, Roxanne M Parslow, Daisy Gaunt, Simon M Collin, Andy Jones, Esther Crawley

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Health and quality of life outcomes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Recent research in myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome: an evidence map.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions for the long-term prevention of hereditary angioedema attacks.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amberly BrigdenPopulation Health Sciences, Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK. amberly.brigden@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7958-7881
Roxanne M ParslowPopulation Health Sciences, Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
Daisy GauntPopulation Health Sciences, Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
Simon M CollinPopulation Health Sciences, Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
Andy JonesPopulation Health Sciences, Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
Esther CrawleyPopulation Health Sciences, Centre for Academic Child Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, 1-5 Whiteladies Road, Bristol, BS8 1NU, UK.
University of Bristol · GB

Funding

Department of Health DRF-2017-10-169Department of Health SRF-2013-06-013National Institute for Health Research SRF-2013-06-013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDefining the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) is important for the design and analysis of clinical trials and ensures that findings are clinically meaningful. Studies in adult populations have investigated the MCID of The Short Form 36 physical function sub-scale (SF-36-PFS). However, to our knowledge no studies have defined the MCID of the SF-36-PFS in a paediatric population. We aimed to triangulate findings from distribution, anchor and qualitative methods to identify the MCID of the SF-36-PFS for children and adolescents with CFS/ME.

methodsQuantitative methods: We analysed routinely-collected data from a specialist paediatric CFS/ME service in South-West England using: 1) the anchor method, based on Clinical Global Impression (CGI) outcomes at 6 months' follow-up; 2) the distribution method, based on the standard deviation of baseline SF-36-PFS scores. Qualitative methods: Young people (aged 12-17 years) and parents were asked to complete the SF-36-PFS, marking each question twice: once for where they would currently rate themselves/their child and a second time to show what they felt would be the smallest amount of change for them/their child to feel treatment had made a difference. Semi-structured interviews were designed to explore what factors were deemed important to patients and to what extent an improvement was considered satisfactory. We thematically analysed qualitative interviews from 21 children and their parents.

resultsQuantitative results: Six-month follow-up data were available for 198 children with a mean age of 14 years. Most were female (74%, 146/198) and 95% gave their ethnicity as "White British". Half the standard deviation of the baseline SF-36-PFS scores was 11.0. "A little better" on the CGI equated to a mean difference on the SF-36-PFS from baseline to 6-month follow-up of 9.0. Qualitative results: Twenty-one children with CFS/ME participated: 16 females (76.2%) with a mean age of 14.4 years. Twenty mothers and two fathers were also interviewed. The median minimal improvement in the SF-36-PFS was 10. Participants indicated that small changes in physical function can lead to important improvements in valued social and family function. Patients and parents were positive about improvement even in the presence of persisting symptoms. Triangulation: The MCID based on the mean score from the three methods was 10.

conclusionsConverging evidence indicates future studies in paediatric CFS/ME should use an MCID of 10 on the SF-36-PFS.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresQuality of LifeAdolescentChildEnglandFatigue Syndrome, ChronicFemaleHumansMaleParentsQualitative ResearchResearch DesignSeverity of Illness IndexCFS/MEChronic fatigue syndromeMinimal clinically important difference (MCID)Myalgic encephalomyelitisPaediatric

Identifiers

PMID30340599
PMCPMC6194701
OpenAlexW2896633751

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.